I have been a CPA for over 30 years focusing on taxation. I have extensive experience with partnerships, real estate and high net worth individuals.
My ideology can be summarized at least metaphorically by this quote:
"I have a total irreverence for anything connected with society except that which makes the roads safer, the beer stronger, the food cheaper and the old men and old women warmer in the winter and happier in the summer." - Brendan Behan
Nobody I work for has any responsibility for what goes into this blog and you should make no inference that they approve of it or even have read it.

Bill O'Reilly Likes Wealth Tax Idea Even Less Than I Do

A wealth tax is an idea that you will see floating around. Marc Lamont Hill was talking with Bill O’Reilly about the concept this week. The discussion got a bit heated

Usually my video clips just add a little flavor to the posts, but in this case I have to ask that you check out at least the first 40 seconds of this one. You will note that Mr. O’Reilly indicates that “Greeeeeen” Party candidate Jill Stein approves of a wealth tax, illustrating the point with a brief clip of Doctor Stein discussing the wealth tax. Here is a longer version of the same clip

Yes. “Cousin Bill” used my interview with Doctor Stein without crediting me. That really doesn’t bother me very much. I am always ready to help out a probable relative, but it is very troubling that he did not give any credit to Interlock Media. The crew from Interlock was an integral part of my first foray into the interview game.

I noted that the wealth tax was part of the Green Party’s platform, so that was one of the things that I asked Doctor Stein about. She indicated that although it was in the platform, it was not a focus of her campaign. One of the problems that “Cousin Bill” had with the wealth tax is the same problem that I saw. How could it possibly be administered without becoming overly intrusive ? Doctor Stein’s answer, in effect, was an indication that what she, if not the party, is really in favor of is an “intangibles tax”. Florida had an intangibles tax until a few years ago. Someone came up with a dodge around the tax using trusts. It was so easy that some people said letting your client pay Florida intangibles tax bordered on malpractice. Rather than plug the loophole, Florida repealed the tax. An intangibles tax would not be that hard if you limited it to publicly traded securities. Stock in closely held companies create difficult valuation issues. A “wealth tax”, in principle, calls for you to value all your stuff, which would be quite a project each year.

Marc Lamont Hill tried to explain some sort of simplified formula that is used to cut down the complexity, but he was unable to get it across. “Cousin Bill” indicated that a wealth tax would be unconstitutional because it involves seizing property. I’m not sure I understand what he was getting at. Taxes are usually paid in money based on some sort of measurement. Presumably with a wealth tax you would do some sort of computation like this one from Pakistan and then pay based on the computation. A wealth tax might violate the Constitution, but unfortunately, Bill did not indicate why he thought it would. Maybe it is self-evident, but it would be nice if he had indicated a section. The estate tax is, in effect, a one time wealth tax and is presumably constitutional.

I am going to study the Hill segment more closely so I can learn to do interviews. I naively thought that you should come up with a pretty good question and then kind of listen to what the interviewee said. Apparently what you need to do is to continually interrupt them and tell them that their ideas are ridiculous. Live and learn.

Are We Related ?

Bill and I have the same last name. Of course, his family apparently decided to keep the patronymic form, while my great-grandfather, Jeremiah chose to drop the “O”. The name Reilly is proverbially associated with wealth, one of the possible explanations for the phrase Life of Riley

This may account for Bill and I both having a negative reaction to the wealth tax. Further evidence of a possible distant relationship is that the name “William” is quite popular in my family. My grandfather, whom I never met was William. My favorite uncle and one of my first cousins were both “Williams’ who went by Bill. My son is also named William, although everybody calls him – well – William. Evidence that points in both directions is that Mr. O’Reilly’s family lived, for a while, in Fort Lee, NJ which is adjacent to Cliffside Park where my Nanna Reilly lived. Since he never showed up there on Sunday afternoon, an absolute requirement for close relatives, the relationship would have to be remote. I should also note that Reilly is rather a common name. Reilly is common enough that there are multiple people named Peter J. Reilly. As this google image search demonstrates, I may well be the most famous, if not the best looking.

Thanks To Bob Baty

I don’t watch the O’Reilly Factor but my most reliable commenter Robert Baty, a retired IRS appeals officer, does. He noted the Jill Stein clip and let me know about it.

Post Your Comment

Post Your Reply

Forbes writers have the ability to call out member comments they find particularly interesting. Called-out comments are highlighted across the Forbes network. You'll be notified if your comment is called out.

Comments

Peter, Fox’s use of your video is considered “fair use” under copyright as Bill O’s show is considered commentary, a very charitable characterization to be sure. Not giving you credit however does violate professional ethics, not that Fox has professional ethics. A note fom you legal to their legal perhaps but they can only suggest. As to your skills as a TV interviewer, not bad. Instead of “ums” try pausing instead. John Stewart gives the most informed interviews in the business despite being a comedian. Or maybe because. So check him and Charlie Rose out.

I would welcome Bill’s on-air thanksgiving to me for bringing it to his attention, directly (I have got no response yet) or indirectly (through my other efforts), regardless of the attribution he gives it as long as he gives an appropriate attribution.

As I noted earlier, it would be a good warm-up for Bill O’Reilly, who has some real problems with religion and church/state issues, as he works on putting together that segment involving Annie Gaylor, Rick Warren, Senator Grassley (or some similar sort), and me regarding the future of IRC 107 and the FFRF IRC 107 Challenge pending in federal district court.

Bill O’Reilly has never responded to my numerous contacts with him about these things.

Rick Warren? Senator Grassley, or his surrogate?

You really think they would be responsive to “me”?

Bill, if you are following this discussion, or your agents are following this discussion, please call me (or email). We can produce the segment for the O’Reilly factor, even if we have to get lesser lights in lieu of Warren and Grassley.

Others with influence on O’Reilly, Warren &/or Grassley are more than welcome to forward my request to them for response.

“This may account for Bill and I both having…” This is incorrect. Should be “for Bill and me.” Early in his first term, Rhodes Scholar Bill Clinton said “for Hillary and I,” something he never again did, possibly because he was chastised by Monica Lewinsky. I will now resume reading “For Who The Bell Tolls.”